Plot Structure Analysis - Marvel's The Avengers

With the release of Marvel's The Avengers: Age of Ultron tonight (I see it tomorrow), I thought that it would be the perfect time to conduct an analysis of the plot structure of it's predecessor: 2012's critically-acclaimed, perfect popcorn movie, Marvel's The Avengers. I had recently picked up a copy of the blue-ray package and went through the entire movie with the time stamp while I took notes (Yay iTunes!). I'm also watching it right now in a tiny box to get me into the mood for this article. The movie is that good.In this article, I'm not going into too much detail. Instead, I'm going to look at the broad structure, break the story down into acts and try to analyze why the structure worked so well in this movie. I'm basing my analysis on the great work the FilmCriticHulk has done in challenging the traditional consensus that movies must have a three-act structure. This is not a review of the screenplay (I leave that for wiser folks than I) but how the story appears in the final product on screen. Almost please note that all time stamps cited in this article are approximate. I hope you enjoy it.Prologue (00:00 - 01:15)The move starts with a short expositional prologue that introduces the Tesseract, the Chitauri, introduces a mysterious villain behind the scenes and summarizes Loki's general plan that "burdens him with glorious purpose". Now I want to introduce a word here "exposition" that you're going to hear a LOT in this article. It simply means a scene or sequence of scenes whose primary purpose is the explain something to the audience.Truth to be told. This prologue is really unnecessary. Nothing is included here that is not better explained later on in the movie. I suppose that the filmmakers were concerned that viewers who hadn't seen the earlier Marvel movies would be confused. In retrospect, I don't that would've been a concern.Act 1: Setting up the MacGuffin (01:15 -11:41)Wow. This ten minutes carries a lot of weight. It mixes the introduction of the MacGuffin (the Tesseract), several major characters including Fury, Hill, Coulson, Selznik, Hawkeye and of course Loki; a ticking-time bomb, Loki's sceptre, Loki's theme of "freedom from freedom", a fun chase scene and a massive explosion that everyone barely escapes. All of this right in the introduction. It is extraordinary who much these ten minutes has to do. The act is primarily expositional. It has to explain to the viewer almost everything they need to know for the rest of the movie. The fact that Whedon was able to mix all of this exposition while keeping everything fast-paced and fun is an extraordinary achievement. This will be a common refrain during this article.Act 2: Avengers Introduced (11:50 - 36:06)The purpose of this section is to introduce the Avengers, set up their internal conflicts and major relationships and bring them to the Helicarrier. Now the delineation of this act was challenging as it doesn't include the introduction of Thor, which I believe should be grouped in Act 3. Once again, this act is dominated by exposition. In short order, we are introduced-

• Introduced to Black Widow, her unique skills in interrogation, and her understandable fear of the Hulk.

• Introduced to the Hulk, his need to help people, how his affliction works, establish the running joke about he controls "the other guy", exposition regarding the Tesseract and why they need Dr. Banner (it emits gamma radiation).

• The strained relationship between the Shield and Fury, the rational behind the Avengers, and the mystery that is "Phase 2".

• Introduce Captain America, his conflict as a man out of time, more exposition of the Tesseract and its connection to Cap's old nemesis "Hydra".

• Introduce Iron Man through a clever transition, re-establish his relationship with Pepper and provide more exposition regarding the Avengers Initiative.

Following a brief interlude which provides more exposition of Loki's deal with the devil (which establishes the high stakes for Loki and drives his motivation), the Act concludes with all of the Avengers (minus Hawkeye and Thor) on the Helicarrier as they watch in amazement as it takes off into the air.Once again, this act of nearly thirty minutes in length is almost purely expositional. But it's so well put together that you don't notice and you don't care.Act 3 - Avengers Dissassembled (36:06 - 1:28:02)If Act 2 was about bringing the Avengers together, then Act 3 is about ripping them apart. This is also the place where the plot really starts to get moving. We start with an expositional scene (again) between Loki and his brainwashed henchmen explaining what they need (Iridium), how they have to get it (scientist's eyeball) and where they have to go (Stuttgart). This scene also foreshadows the assault on the helicarrier.The Avengers apprehend Loki in Stuttgart but not before he has re-established his theme (Freedom from Freedom), had his team steal the Iridium and laid a beating on Captain America that has him questioning his place in this time. In Loki's defeat, we also establish a conflict between playboy Iron Man and straight-laced Captain America that will be resolved much later.The Avengers transport of Loki is interrupted by Thor who takes Loki away to the Black Forest for some family time. This scene gives the movie the chance to provide more exposition regarding Thor and Loki's relationship ("shadow living in the shadow of your greatness", provide context to Loki's motivation and again provide opportunity for Loki to expand on his "Freedom from freedom" theme.But don't worry. After all of this exposition, we get a fight. This fight establishes the parameters of their powers (remember Thor's lightning) and gives Cap an opportunity to establish his leadership position that grows during the movie while building respect from the other Avengers (in this case, Thor especially).Following his capture, Loki is brought back to the Helicarrier where he is imprisoned. Despite Loki's helplessness, the Avengers began to fall apart due to their internal conflicts and mistrust. We establish that with Loki's presence, Banner doesn't quite feel right, we get more exposition of the Chitauri, the purpose of the stolen Iridium (stabilize the portal), explain the portal and what it's to be used for (bring the Chitauri army to earth), all the while showing the heroes growing more distrustful of each other and SHIELD. The Act comes to a head when the Avengers learn about Phase 2, leading to an argument that, mixed with the assault on the helicarrier, the unleashing of the Hulk, the death of Coulson, the reveal regarding the location of the Tesseract, and the disabling of the helicarrier pulls the Avengers apart and leaves them at their lowest points.Again, we got a lot of exposition but it's worth it to finally see the Hulk in action and see how terrifying he truly is. Things to watch out for are the surprising but perfectly suited friendship between Banner and Stark, Black Widow's interrogation of Loki, and Cap's belief that Stark is selfish and not capable of making the sacrifice play. It's also interesting that both Cap and Stark are right. Stark is right to not trust SHIELD while Cap is right that Loki is trying to play them. Well done Mr. Whedon.We also get the joy of watching Black Widow run from the Hulk, the Hulk and Thor fight, Iron Man and Captain America forced to work together, Thor and Loki argue, Coulson's death, Black Widow and Hawkeye fight, and finally Loki's escape.When the movie was released, the only major criticism of the story was there didn't seem to be a reason for Loki to allow himself to get captured. In short, the assault on the Helicarrier didn't make any sense. In watching the movie again, it is suggested that Loki, under Hawkeye's, felt the need to disable the only identifiable threat to his plan. So I think it's acceptable. Besides, who cares? Did you not see the summary above. This Act is awesome!Act 4 - Avengers Reassembled (1:37:27 - 2:08:46)In the beginning of this act, we find our heroes broken. It takes a manipulation by Fury (Coulson's cards) to push them back into action, not before we get more exposition regarding the Tesseract, the Avengers Initiative, Hulk's reflection, the deprogramming of Hawkeye and the realization that Loki will use Stark Tower as the portal.Reinvigorated, the Avengers reassemble just in time to take on the invasion of the Chitauri. At this point, the exposition that has dominated the movie up until this point takes a back seat to the action. It still jumps in to explain what the heroes have to do to beat the Chitauri and close the portal but it's a supplement to the action, not the major driver of the story. This act is more about the action and closing a lot of the loops that it has opened throughout the preceding 100 minutes such as Hulk's secret ("I'm always angry), Cap's ascension to leadership and finding his place in this world, and Stark's choice to sacrifice himself to save New York City from being destroyed by a nuclear blast.Act 5 - Resolution (2:08:46 - 2:13:09)With Loki vanquished, all of the story threads are closed in relatively short order. Loki is arrested and taken back to Asgard (at least until Thor: The Dark World), the Tesseract is taken out of reach, the heroes disperse back to their "regular" lives and Fury confronts the council. This final act also gives the audience an audience to enjoy our heroes success and say their goodbyes (at least until the next Marvel movie).ConclusionIn short, that's the plot breakdown of Marvel's The Avengers. I admit that my article is a little on the wordy side but there is so much in this movie to talk about. The biggest surprise for me in writing this article was the realization over how much exposition was in this movie. When I say it the first couple of times, I didn't even notice. Typically, writers try to avoid exposition because it's usually boring. However, what is remarkable in this movie is how Joss Whedon is able to make it work and make it fun. He mixes in so many jokes, character moments, conflicts, and other clever tools that you don't even notice. It is a massive accomplishment that he was able to make this work so seamlessly.So to close, if you're a writer and you have to write an exposition scene, watch Marvel's The Avenger and see how you can make it fun. As for the rest of us, we'll be at the multiplexes watching Age of Ultron.

The Canvasser: The Protagonists

In this week's post about the development of my screenplay, The Canvasser, I wanted to take a moment to discuss the two most characters in the story: the candidate Devon Shire and his campaign manager Marie Bellechance (names subject to change) and their roles in the screenplay.Devon Shire, protagonist and titular character, starts the movies as an earnest yet slow-witted political canvasser who dreams of working in the Parliament of Canada. Despite spending seven years of his life volunteering for the party, his dreams are blocked by a lack of connections and a Parliamentary culture focused on prestige. Underemployed and with his savings nearly drained, Devon is faced with a ticking clock until he forced to go on welfare. A chance encounter convinces him to take a long-shot run for Ottawa City Council.As the protagonist in a comedy, Devon has to be likeable, has to be someone that the audience can laugh at and be enough of an underdog to win the audiences sympathy. If all of these elements are done well, then the audience will laugh at his failures, cheer on his small victories and general want to see him succeed against overwhelming odds.Why does likability matter? It the audience doesn't like Devon, then the movie won't work. The audience won't care about his dire situation, his dreams or his long-shot campaign. While you can have a main character that isn't likeable, like an anti-hero, it's much more difficult to pull off and it has be part of their personal journey towards becoming a better person. In the case of The Canvasser, I tried to make Devon someone that audiences could get behind right from the beginning. Devon is polite, works hard and constantly looks on the bright side of life. He has small dreams but pursues them with passion no matter what obstacles are thrown his way. I also work to endear him to the audience by throwing obstacles at him that are clearly unfair. I keep him underemployed, prevent him from getting the job of his dreams for reasons of dubious merit, and give him "friends" that certainly don't have his interests at heart. These are all things that we've experienced in their own lives and so the hope is that the audience sees a little bit of themselves in Devon's plight.In almost every story, the protagonist needs to have a personality flaw that holds them back in some way, shape or form. This flaw creates tension early on and provides momentum to the story as the character has to learn how resolve or overcome his flaw. The process of resolving this tension provides the character with a character arc that drives the story forward and shows his personal growth. In the case of The Canvasser, Devon's flaw is that he lacks self-respect. He has spent his life giving his time to candidates and parties that have no use for him. His friends use him at their leisure and life keeps kicking him down. His long-shot campaign isn't really about winning or losing, it's about learning to believe in himself and see himself and his life as worthwhile. When he succeeds in this goal, he gains pride in himself the respect of those around him. While he loses the campaign, he does find a job and get his career started. Thus when the movie ends, the audience is satisfied that Devon's in much better place than when he started.The second major character and almost a co-protagonist in the story is Marie Bellechance, a highly sought after political organizer who cut her teeth in the Assembly of First Nations. By this point in her life, Marie is disillusioned, cynical about politics and is ready to move to the private sector and cash in. Her flaw is her lack of faith in politics and it's potential to bring forth positive and needed change. Based on her experience on her knowledge of the history of colonialism, she has come to the conclusion that politics is simply about two things: money and winning and usually in that order. This makes her a perfect foil to Devon and provides loads of opportunities for both conflict and comedy.When I wrote the original draft, my focus was on Devon but when I went back and edited it, I found I was more and more interested in Marie and her personal story. I liked that she was a strong and active character with her own needs and internal conflicts. She is not there simply to support Devon but has her own goals and dreams, all of which are challenged by Devon's optimism. So I went back and furthered developed her story so that she would go through an arc where she moves from a cynic looking to cash in to an inspirational leader who takes charge of her and the country's future, based heavily on her experiences with Devon's campaign. Likewise, once Devon completes his arc and gains respect for himself, he steps aside and supports Marie as she steps up and fulfills her potential. I attempted to create a story where two characters have their personal character arcs of equal importance and mutually reinforcing. At this point, I'm not sure it's there yet but it's certainly come a long way.The major challenge with having two protagonists in as screenplay is length. Currently, the last draft was about 136 pages which is far too long. Based on the advice of some friends, I hope to get it down to about 115-120 pages at a maximum. Hopefully, I won't have to cut any of the character development scenes of these two characters as I feel they're the heart and soul of the story.That's all for now. Hopefully, I'll have some exciting news for you soon.

The Canvasser: Clean Cut Humour - A Blast from the Past

Following up on my prior post, the next project that I've been working on is the Canvasser, a screenplay about an earnest but overmatched volunteer who decides to make a long-shot run for city council before he has to go on welfare. Today, I want to go into some details about the type of humour I tried to emulate.Over the past twenty years, film comedies have tended to become more raunchy, violent and predicated on shock value to generate humour. This trend appeared to start with Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, continued in There's Something About Mary and reached its zenith with The Hangover trilogy. The growing success of this type of comedy has influenced the spec screenplay market to produce more extreme or shocking comedy stories in order to stand out from the crowd, make their first sell and get their start in the industry. Please see the excellent screenplay review website, ScriptShadow, for more details on the trends in the spec screenplay market.However, I did not feel comfortable a comedy in that vein. First, I don't think I would good at it. Two, I'm a public servant, a job I love and respect. I would not want to write anything that would reflect poorly on my employer and the Canadian public at large. It may be a day job, but it's a day job that I enjoy and want to keep doing. Third and finally, I think the type of market for that type of comedy has become extremely saturated. Audiences have seen this same type of comedy over and over again and have seen the enveloper pushed further and further. I'm not sure that there's much left to mine in shock gaps and gross-old comedy. Furthermore, I believe that it's hindered innovation and creativity in the comedic film genre in the North American market. Comedy has become formulaic and quite frankly dull. In the last few years, I've become more interested in the British style of comedies as pioneered by Edgar Wright and his compatriots Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. Their Cornetto Trilogy films Shaun of the Death, Hot Fuzz (ESPECIALLY Hot Fuzz!) and The World's End, used smart  writing, clever composition, innovative cuts and shots to create humour in ways that we hadn't seen before. Hot Fuzz is so full of clever ideas that you don't notice some of them on first viewing. One of my favourite jokes is when Nicholas Angel meets the Sandford Police Service and we cut to a shot of Sgt. Tony Fisher, played by Kevin Eldon, looking up. Behind Sgt. Fisher is a easel pad with numerous negative traits like disloyal, rudy and unfit encircling Sgt. Fisher's head.These three movies are full of smart jokes like this that take advantage of the unique advantages of cinema. This seemed like to meet a far more promising source of inspiration then the latest gross-out comedy.In terms of political comedies, most films approach the subject of politics from a cynical perspective, presenting politicians as self-interested narcissists, voters as apathetic and stupid and the system as fundamentally broken. While some of these critiques are valid, it is not the image of politics that I have seen over my experiences volunteering on numerous politicians and interacting with voters for over a decade. Political campaigns are driven by thousands of people who sacrifice their free time with no or little expectation of reward or comparisons because they care about their home and how it is run. Voters care greatly at politics, they just don't like the options, or lack thereof, that they're presented with. In my municipal campaign, I was blown away by the technical expertise and intelligence held by many citizens about some very complex subjects. I saw hundreds of people work hard for free to shape their communities for generations to come. Unlike most political comedies, my experiences have given me a hopeful and optimistic view of politics in Canada and I wanted to translate that hope and optimism to a comedy.Based on the above reasons, I tried to establish a number of rules that I tried to follow when writing the first draft:

• Don't insult voters, they fully deserve our respect;
• Keep it clean, there are enough gross-out comedies, we don't need another one;
• Be innovative, try to use the strengths of cinema to create jokes and gags that haven't been seen before.
• Be positive, there's a solid heart of hope and optimism inherent in our politics, try to capture that as best I can.

I tried to follow these rules as best I can during the first draft and I'll try to reinforce it during the subsequent drafts.That's enough for today. In subsequent posts, I'll go into detail about the two main characters, their flaws and their motivations; and then general five act structure that I wanted to follow in writing the screenplay.

My Next Project: The Canvasser

Hi. Today, I wanted to tell everyone what I'm working on for my next project and why. I hope to write a series of posts highlighting the development of this project to help people understand a little more what goes into the writing process. In this case, my next project is a screenplay that I've called The Canvasser.

Logline

An unemployed and disrespected political canvasser takes a long-shot run for city council before going on welfare.

Genesis

The genesis of this story came out of my experiences canvassing on before of political parties for many years for a volunteer and as a candidate for councillor in the recently completed municipal election. Over my years of experience, I've encountered a lot of unique and humorous situations that would ideal for a comedy. Another influence for this story is a guest lecture that I gave a Carleton University last year about political communication. My ideas, which I attempted to present in a humorous fashion, were a big hit with the students as they simplified a great deal of theory and research into simple, easily understood, and memorable principles that were easy to remember. A screenplay provides an opportunity to present these ideas in a more visual and easily digestible format. It also gave me an opportunity to work in a genre (Comedy) that I've never worked in before, which will help to develop my skills in writing humour.

Genre

Political Comedy. I chose a comedy not only to develop a weakness of my writing (comedy) but also because it fit with a lot of the experiences that I have encountered during my canvassing career. There is a lot more to political campaigns than what you see in movies, most of which is pretty funny and so I wanted to capture these experiences in a format that people would enjoy, understand and remember.

Format

Screenplay. I've chosen the screenplay format because the story in my head, which is dependant on cutting and contrast to develop humour, is tailored specifically to the strengths of video. It is unlikely that I would ever be able to sell this screenplay but if I keep the cost low enough, it may be something that I could make on micro-budget sometime in the future.

Still to Come

That's all the detail I want to go into for now. In future posts, I'll talk about my characters, the structure of the screenplay, and my writing and later editing process. Ciao for now.

Elmore Leonard Passes Away at 87

Sad news today as the world found out that legendary crime writer Elmore Leonard had passed away at the age of 87. While he had lived a full life, wrote more novels than I could read in a lifetime and saw many of those ideas translated into movies, it is still sad to see him go.I haven't read him enough to render a full opinion of him or his body of work but he certainly has had a major impact on several generations of writers with his ten rules of writing. Thankfully, Gail Bowen of the Globe and Mail has reposted the ten rules. I fully recommend that you check it out. If you are a writer, then I hope these rules will have as much influence as they had (and continue to have) on me.

A Game of Thrones Book Review

After hearing so much about the Game of Thrones television show and the numerous media (such as Skyrim) that cite it as a reference, I decided to finally tackle the massive A Song of Fire and Ice series by George R.R. Martin. After plowing my way through the first book in the series, A Game of Thrones, it is pretty clear that I am hooked on the series. By what really struck me was the similarities between it and the recent book I reviewed, Spook Country by William Gibson.Even though they both use multiple perspectives to tell their stories, I found that my enjoyment of the two books was completely different. Spook Country left me flat while A Game of Thrones drew me in and seduced me into reading further. But why were they so different? What did George R.R. Martin do right that William Gibson did wrong. Because of this conundrum, I decided to do a comparison of the two books rather than a straight-forward review of A Game of Thrones. I hope that by doing so, we might identify some of the general storytelling fundamentals in play.Let's start with their one major similarity: multiple perspectives.Multiple perspectivesBoth A Game of Thrones and Spook Country tell their stories through a third person limited narrative. In short, the narrative focuses on the perspective of a single character, but does not take the voice of this character. The reader is limited to the viewpoint of a single character but the text is written in the third person. This is a fairly standard narrative style, especially in mysteries, as the reader is limited to the knowledge of the protagonist, and thus must follow him or her as they unravel the plot, enhancing the tension. However, what makes both A Game of Thrones and Spook Country so unique in this narrative structure is that the story follows a different character in each chapter. To use the example of A Game of Thrones, the story may follow the perspective of Tyrion Lannister in one chapter and Eddard Stark in the next. Spook Country limits this perspective to three characters while A Game of Thrones changes to whichever character strikes Martin's fancy. The end result is quite different. Whereas Spook Country is relatively dull with stilted, uninteresting characters (with the possible exception of Tito), A Game of Thrones sucks you into the characters lives and involves you intensely with the life and death struggles. Does this mean that the characters of A Game of Thrones are more or distinctively. No, not really. I don't think its the characters themselves that make them so compelling. It's how Martin sets up their stories, creating a sense of ....... AnticipationLet's take a look at some of the characters in A Game of Thrones. WARNING: This section does contain stories.Bran StarkFormerly a strong climber, Bran is crippled when he thrown off a tower by Jaime Lannister for spotting him cavorting with his sister, and Queen, Cersei Lannister. Now a paraplegic, Bran try to find a way to make himself useful to a world that worships men of war. To get around, Bran gets around by riding on the back of Hordor, a slow-witted half-giant. Will he ride Hodor into battle and turn the tide?Tyrion LannisterA dwarf disrespected by everyone, especially his own snooty family, Tyrion gets by on his wits while holding fast to a personal code of honour that far exceeds those of the rest of his family. Will he overcome society's prejudices to find the glory and victory he so rightly deserves?Daenerys TargaryenAlong with her brother, the only two surviving offspring of the former King of the Seven Kingdoms. Daenerys sacrifices greatly for survival, including being married of by her brother, losing her husband and daughter, and her place in Dothraki society. Isolated and alone, she takes her three dragon (which have extinct for centuries) eggs into a pyre and watches as they hatch and bond to her as their mother. Will she lead her dragon children into an assault on the Seven Kingdoms to retake Iron Throne?Eddard StarkReluctantly taking on the responsibility of the King's Hand, Eddard must unravel the mysteries of the attack on his son Bran and the death of the former Hand, Jon Arryn. Will he unravel the mystery or will he fall in the game of thrones.Jon SnowThe bastard son of Eddard Stark, Jon Snow volunteers to serve on the wall to find some place of honour in a world that has none for bastards. Amongst his rag-tag group of ruffians, will he overcome his station to protect the Seven Kingdoms from the unknown threats to the north?Arya StarkA tomboy, Arya is more interested in learning to fight with a sword than the courtly manners of her sister Sansa.  Reluctantly, her failure allows her to be trained by a cunning, yet eccentric sword master. Will she one day grow up to command respect as a warrior, not just as a prospective bride?As you can see in each of the cases, I am filling in the story far off into the future while Martin is still introducing me to them. By setting up most of the characters as weak, unloved, ignored or disrespected, he is giving me an opportunity to fill in the story with how I want things to turn out. We all love underdog characters. We want to see them overcome their challenges and find the respect of their peers because we face these same sorts of struggles day in and day. George R.R. Martin fills A Game of Thrones with underdogs and that is why I have to keep reading. I have to find out what happens to them.In Spook Country, we have a former rock star, a drug addict and a superhuman parkour specialist. They're unique but they're not really underdogs. They don't feel overwhelmed or at risk in the world in which they find themselves. Even at the end when Hollis is captures, the tension is immediately diffused by the secret underworld character asking her to be a witness to their operations. There is simply little sense of danger and even less sense of overcoming the odds.SympathyAnother way in which Martin uses the multiple perspectives well is building sympathy for characters who later perish. When you are in close promixity  in someone's shoes, you feel greater sense of loss when they are gone. It's the reasons that we mourn for family and friends but not for complete strangers. We can react with horror and sadness but its far more abstract then when it's someone you know personally. In the case of A Game of Thrones, we are introduced to a couple of characters who later perish. Walking in their faces, we gain a measure of sympathy for them that makes their later deaths, seen from another character's perspective, that much more powerful. It also makes the world feel like a far more dangerous place. In Spook Country, nobody dies. It brings me to my final point when comparing the two novels.Raising the StakesIn A Game of Thrones, the stakes are huge and growing with each passing chapter. People die, the land is plagued by war and atrocities, and new threats can be sensed over the horizon, across the war and beyond the sea. In Martin's opening book, characters are fighting for their future, Kings are fighting for kingdoms, and humanity in general is fighting for its survival. The growing sense of threat and danger ramp up the tension, pulling us forward and deeper into the book anxious to see what happens next. In the case of Spook Country, danger is muted. Nobody really seems in trouble. Nobody is killed and threats go unfilled. Even the central mystery falls flat, rather than the MacGuffan threatening humanity or even an individual, it comes off instead as post-modern joke. It may be clever or interesting but as a storytelling device, it falls flat. In A Game of Thrones, stakes are simpler, more menacing and easier to feel. The story greater benefits as a result.In short, A Game of Thrones is an excellent fantasy novel that I can't recommend highly enough. It will grab you and never let you go. I hope that by comparing it to Spook Country I've been able to show why it's so effective and how it can serve as a template for aspiring authors. I'm well into the second book of the series, A Clash of Kings, and it's still going strong.

Michael Arndt’s Eight Steps for “Setting the Story in Motion”

One of the hidden gems on the 4-disc Toy Story 3 Blu-Ray package from Disney is a ten-minute short film by screenwriter Michael Arndt. In it, Arndt reveals the eight step process that he found in films like Toy Story, Finding Nemo and The Incredibles that helped him in writing Toy Story 3. Despite its short length, Arndt’s theory is an excellent contribution that deserves a closer look.1) Show Your Main CharacterIntroduce the audience to your main character. As most of the story follows their perspective, you need to establish him in the mind of the audience. In the case of Toy Story, this is Woody. He is a toy that comes alive when humans aren’t watching.2) Introduce the Universe that They Live In.Give your audience a chance to see the world that the protagonist lives in. In the case of Toy Story, we see that Woody lives in Andy’s room with the other toys.3) Show Your Character’s Grand PassionShow your character doing the thing that they love the most. What is their Grand Passion? In Woody’s case, his grand passion is his place as Andy’s favourite toy. He has the favoured position Andy’s bed and the introductory playtime sequences always show him as the star of Andy’s imagination.4) Show Your Character’s Hidden Flaw.Only boring protagonists are perfect. Show the audience your main character’s flaw. Give them a flaw that comes out of their grand passion, that comes out of the thing they love doing the most. In Woody’s case, it’s pride. As Andy’s favourite toy, he has a lot of pride about his place in Andy’s bedroom. It is only natural that he gets his comeuppance.5) Hint at Storm Clouds on the HorizonVery subtly, hint to your audience that there is trouble out on the horizon. In the case of Toy Story, those storms clouds are Andy’s birthday party. All of the other toys are afraid of being replaced. Only Woody, proud of his status as Andy’s favourite tool, is unworried.6) Turn Your Character’s World Upside DownSomething comes into your hero’s life and turns it upside down. It takes away their grand passion. In the case of Woody, the introduction of Buzz Lightyear changes everything. Because Buzz is such a cool tool, Andy and all of the other toys prefer him. Woody finds himself relegated to the Toy Chest while Buzz gets the preferred spot on Andy’s bed. Woody has lost his greatest possession: his status as Andy’s favourite toy.7) Add Insult to InjuryIf that is not enough, you have to add insult to injury. It is not enough to take away your protagonist's grand passion, you always have to humiliate him in the process. In the case of Toy Story, not only does he lose his place as favourite toy to Buzz, Buzz has no idea that he’s a toy! As Woody loses favour, you can see his frustration at Buzz’s cluelessness. He’s being replaced by an imbecile! This step is important to show your character’s frustration at a world that is completely unfair.8) Have Your Character Make the Wrong ChoiceThis is the big one. Bring your main character to a fork in the road. At this fork, they have two choices: a right choice and a wrong choice. Of course the character makes a wrong choice. Having seen what he has gone through, we understand perfectly why he makes the wrong choice. We even WANT him to make the wrong choice. This wrong choice comes out of his grand passion and provokes a crisis that sets us on our way to Act 2. Let’s take Toy Story again. In Toy Story, Woody, having been displaced and insulted by the deluded Buzz Lightyear, decides to try to knock Buzz behind the dresser so that Andy will have to take him to Pizza Planet. The plan goes awry, Buzz is knocked out the window, and the other toys blame Woody, leaving him no choice but to find and return Buzz to Andy’s room. That leads us right into Act 2.Arndt shows us the same structure at play in Finding Nemo and The Incredibles. The structure works well because the plot develops from the hero’s internal character, making it more personal. It also gives us something that character, alongside the main plot, must resolve inside himself. In the case of Toy Story, Woody not only brings back Buzz safely, but he also learns how to overcome his flaws and earn the friendship of Buzz. The hero’s journey becomes as much metaphysical as physical.But how can we apply these lessons to our own stories. In my case, Arndt’s theory forced a number of changes in the opening Act of Evermore: Call of the Nocturne. While  I found that I had followed several of his steps already, thinking his theory allowed me to make some changes that greatly improved the opening act. Please let me go through it one step at a time.1) Show Your Main CharacterIn Evermore: Call of the Nocturne, the reader is introduced to Mmorpg, a geekish computer nerd who has difficulty dealing with people directly. He prefers the virtual world to the real world as he has far more control over it.2) Introduce the Universe that They Live In.Mmorpg lives in Vancouver, BC. But his real home is at his laboratory at the University of British Columbia where he administrates a virtual online world known as Evermore.3) Show Your Character’s Grand PassionMmorpg’s greatest passion is Evermore itself. Having created the most popular Massively-Multiplayer Online (MMO) game in the world, Mmorpg is understandably proud of his accomplishment. He believes that Evermore will change the world for the better and thus he is very protective of it, allowing only himself access to the computer code that sustains it.4) Show Your Character’s Hidden Flaw.Mmorpg’s hidden flaw is his pride towards his creation. Enamoured by its possibilities, Mmorpg is unable or unwilling to see its possible consequences, both to himself and others.5) Hint at Storm Clouds on the HorizonDuring the opening chapters, Evermore’s Initial Public Offering (IPO) is mentioned nervously. In a few days, stock will be sold in the online world, making all of its founders, especially Mmorpg, incredibly rich.6) Turn Your Character’s World Upside DownMmorpg’s world is shattered when a little girl dies inside Evermore. Having written the security protocols that are meant to protect people inside the virtual world, Mmorpg is dumbfounded by failure. He continually insists that they are perfect despite the obvious evidence to the contrary.7) Add Insult to InjuryWith the death of the little girl, it is obvious that the government will move in to shut down Evermore. All of Mmorpg’s hard work, all of his sacrifices will have been for nothing. While he watches helplessly, his life’s work is falling to pieces.8) Have Your Character Make the Wrong ChoiceRather than choose to go straight to the authorities, as he should, Mmorpg chooses instead to perpetrate a massive coverup. He seals off the crime scene and disables the logout function, trapping everyone including the killer inside Evermore. To ensure that nobody gets wise, he tricks anyone who attempts to log out by trapping them inside another virtual reality where they log out, feel tired, and go to bed for a nap. Given that he can’t keep people locked up in the virtual world forever, Mmorpg is forced to find the killer. To that end, his organization hires a dangerous mercenary called Blue and we are into the 2nd Act.It was here that Arndt’s advice really paid dividends. Originally, Mmorpg simply makes the choice because, well because the plot demanded it. I hadn’t made the case in the character of Mmorpg why he would do such a thing. With Arndt’s theory, I made his connection to his creation far stronger in the early going, introduced the storm crowds (the government) that threatens to take away his dream, and confront him directly with the moral choice that leads us into the 2nd Act. Now we know why Mmorpg makes that decision and more importantly, we want him to make that decision. Furthermore, this moral choice makes Mmorpg’s eventual comeuppance (no spoilers) and reconciliation far more effective.Michael Arndt himself states that these steps are not for every story, but they are a useful tool to help you develop the opening to your story. In my case, they helped to make a good opening even better. I hope that they’ll help you too.